REINTERPRETING THE WESTEAND AFFAIR: THEORIES OF THE STATE AND CORE EXECUTIVE DECISION MAKING

Abstract

This article applies four theories of the state to the analysis of a major policy crisis, the Westland affair of 1985–6. The pluralist governmental politics model offers a narrowly political account stressing that multiple actors were involved, and that policy emerged from a complex sequence of individual decisions, with plenty of room for misunderstandings and slip‐ups. The instrumental Marxist view by contrast emphasizes the penetration of government by business interests and the closed, elite character of decision making. The policy entrepreneur explanation offers a ‘new right’ account: the affair was born from a clash between a spending minister using public monies to pursue personal interests, and central actors and agencies seeking to limit the commitment of state expenditure. Finally, the ‘symbolic politics’ interpretation analyses the crisis as the interaction of four ideologically resonant ‘games’– about leadership challenges, leaking of government ‘secrets’, executive‐Parliament relations, and mass media ‘battles’.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.